NICK LEE GRIEGO APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS APPELLEE

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, Amarillo.

NICK LEE GRIEGO, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

NO. 07-09-00206-CR

Decided: October 26, 2010

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

ORDER

In light of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals's recent decision in Brooks v. State, No. PD-0210-09, 2010 Tex.Crim.App. LEXIS 1240 (Tex.Crim.App. Oct. 6, 2010) (plurality opinion) and pursuant to Rule 50 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we withdraw our opinion issued in the instant cause on June 6, 2010, in which this Court found the evidence to be factually insufficient to support a state-jail felony conviction of evading arrest or detention using a vehicle and reversed and remanded the cause for a new trial.   See Tex.R.App. P. 50.   The State has filed a motion for reconsideration and an amended petition for discretionary review.   In its motion for reconsideration, the State asks that this Court reconsider its opinion in the instant cause and affirm the trial court's judgment of conviction based on the State's proposed application of Brooks.

Though we reserve our opinion as to the precise import of Brooks and express no opinion about such at this time, we note that the plurality opinion in Brooks has called into question the viability of factual sufficiency as a distinct point on which disposition of an appeal may rest.   In light of this potentially notable development and its potential application to the instant cause, we exercise our authority under Rule 38.9 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure to order the parties to brief the issues of evidentiary sufficiency presented by this case in light of Brooks.   See Tex.R.App. P. 38.9(b).

The parties will please note that we have abridged the timetable for filing these supplemental briefs.   See Tex.R.App. P. 38.7.   Appellant's brief will be due no later than twenty days from the date of this order.   The State's brief is due twenty days from the date appellant's brief is filed.   No motions for extension of time will be entertained by the Court.   After the parties have filed their briefs, we will consider the application of Brooks and promptly issue another opinion in the instant cause pursuant to Rule 50.

We, therefore, grant that portion of the State's motion asking this Court to reconsider its opinion in the instant cause in light of Brooks.   Because the merits of the State's proposed application of Brooks to the instant cause will be further developed by briefing and addressed in the Court's forthcoming opinion, we will carry that portion of the State's motion asking this Court to affirm the trial court's judgment until such time that the Court has the benefit of the parties' briefing on this issue.

It is so ordered.

Do not publish.

Per Curiam

Copied to clipboard